List of Attacks

If Islam were a Violent Religion Then All Muslims Would Be Violent

The Game:

Most Muslims live peacefully, without harming anyone, so how can Islam be a violent religion?
If Islam were the religion of terrorists then why aren’t most Muslims terrorists?

The Truth:

If we are supposed to make assumptions about an ideology based on the behavior of
adherents, then we would have to conclude that Islam is different and dangerous. True, most Muslims are not terrorists, but most terrorists are Muslim.
If Islam is a religion of peace then why is it the only one that consistently
produces religiously-motivated terrorist attacks each and every day of the year?

Rather than
answer a question with a question, let's just say that the reason most Muslims don't kill
is that, regardless of what Islam may or may not teach, it's
wrong to kill over religion. Most people know deep down that if
God wanted people dead for not believing in Muhammad's version of him, then he's perfectly capable of doing
the job himself.

Here's a similar question with identical logic to the "If the Quran taught
violence then all Muslims would be violent" argument:

"If the Quran taught that a thief's hand should be cut off,
then all Muslims would cut off hands."

We can all agree that very few Muslims cut off hands and that a majority (perhaps) believe
it is wrong to do so. If the logic were sound, then this would be proof that the Quran
does not say to cut off hands.

But the Quran does say this... quite clearly:

Cut off the hand of the thief, male or
female, as a recompense for that which they committed, a punishment by way of
example from Allah. 5:38

This is also the example set by Muhammad according to the Hadith (Bukhari
81:792). Yet, the vast majority of Muslims do not do this.

What this means is that proof of what Islam teaches or what the Quran says is not based on whether the majority of Muslims choose to do it.

As individuals, Muslims make their own choices about which
parts of their religion they practice and which parts they would rather dismiss
via
the guise of "context".

Adherents may think
or say whatever they want to about Islam, it
doesn't change what Islam says about itself. As a documented ideology,
Islam exists
independently of anyone's opinion. As such, it may be studied
objectively, apart from how anyone practices or chooses to interpret
it.

The Quran
plainly teaches that it is not only proper to kill in the name of Allah in
certain circumstances, but that it is
required.
Muslims who don't believe
in killing over religion either do not know of Muhammad's example or prefer a moral law that is independent of it. Those
who put Islam first or know Islam best will think and act differently, even if they are in the minority.

Few Muslims have ever read the Quran
to any extent, much less pursued an honest investigation of the actual words and
deeds of Muhammad (which were more in line with hedonism, deception, power and violence
than moral restraint). The harsh rules that Muslim countries impose on
free speech to protect Islam from examination also prevent it from being fully
understood. In the West, many Muslims, devout or otherwise, simply prefer
to believe that Islam is aligned with the Judeo-Christian principles of peace
and tolerance, even if it requires filtering evidence to the contrary.

As Taslima Nasreen succinctly puts it, "Islam is a violent ideology. Most
Muslims are not violent - because they believe Islam is not
violent."

But, while most Muslims are peaceful in spite of Islam, others are dangerous because of it. It is what the rest of us
comfortably refer to as "radicalization" - an 'affliction' that is conspicuously endemic to Islam.

Purists
who take Islam to heart are more likely to become
terrorists than humanitarians. Those most
prone to abandoning themselves to Muhammad's message with no moral filter are always the more
dangerous and supremacist-minded. They may be called ‘extremists’ or ‘fundamentalists,’ but, at
the end of the day, they are dedicated to the Quran and
the path of Jihad as mandated by Muhammad.

[Note: Christian apologist, David Wood makes an excellent point about the distinction between a religious command and obedience. No Christian is perfect, he says, but this doesn't change the fact that they are told to be (Matthew 5:48).]